the international journal of organizational innovation - IJOI

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION VOLUME 5 NUMBER 4 APRIL 2013 Table of Contents 3

Information Regarding The International Journal of Organizational Innovation

4

Information Regarding The 2013 International Conference on Organizational Innovation

5

The 2013 Board Of Editors

Page: Title:

Author(s):

7

Knowledge Management In Educational Organizations - A Perspective Of Knowledge Spiral: Wei-Li Wu, Yi-Chih Lee, Hui-Shing Shu

14

Re-Thinking The Future Of Learning - The Possibilities And Limitations Of Technology In Education In The 21st Century: Raysa Leer, Sergey Ivanov

21

The Influence Of Leadership Behavior And Psychological Empowerment On Job Satisfaction: Li-Fen Lin, Chun-Chieh Tseng

30

A Case Study On The Model Of Strategic Entrepreneurship: Hung-Jung Chang, Hsien- Bin Wang

45

Organization Derobotized - Innovation And Productivity In A Workplace Environment: Sofia Stasishyn, Sergey Ivanov

52

A Multi-Cases Comparative Approach On Forming Elements Of Dynamic Capability: Hung-Jung Chang, Jia-Jeng Hou, Szu-Ju Lin

65

The Relationship Between Corporate Social Responsibility, Job Satisfaction And Organizational Commitment: Ching-Sing You, Chun-Chen Huang, Hsien-Bin Wang, Kang-Ni Liu, Chien-Hsiung Lin, Ji-Shou Tseng

78

A Review And Critical Analysis Of The Principles Of Scientific Management: Kai-Ping Huang, Jane Tung, Sheng Chung Lo, Mei-Ju Chou

The International Journal of Organizational Innovation Vol 5 Num 4 April 2013

1

86

A Deeper Look Into Education From The U.S.A. To Amman, Jordan: Sana J. Kifafi, Sergey Ivanov

91

Budgetary Participation And Slack On The Theory Of Planned Behavior: Chin-Chun Su, Feng-Yu Ni

100

Empirical Study On Influential Determinants For Enterprise Capital Reduction: Evidence From Cash Reduction And Stock Repurchase: Hung-Ting Yeh, Yu-Xun Huang, Kaie-Chin Chung

115

The Considered Adoption Of Innovative Farming By The Leisure - Farm Owners In The Greater Taipei Area: Yung-Chieh Chen, Shu-Chun Chang

124

A Study On The Relationship Amidst Health Consciousness, Ecological Affect, And Purchase Intention Of Green Production: Ling-Yu Melody Wen, Shang-Hui Li

138

A Review Of Horticultural Therapy And Caregiver’s Burden: Chia-Hui Lin

147

Biogas Potential In Tao-Yuan County, Taiwan: Kai-Min Wang, Yii-Der You, Ying-Chin Chen, Nien-Hsun Li

155

Ultra-Low Temperature Tuna Longliners Industry In Taiwan - An Application Of Supply Chain Management: Chien-Jung Huang, Wen-Ching Kuo, ShiangHuei Kung

165

Effects Of Emotional Labor And Job Satisfaction On Organizational Citizenship Behaviors - A Case Study On Business Hotel Chains: Chia-Ju Lu, Yi-Yu Shih, Yi-Lien Chen

177

A Study On The Design Entrepreneurship And The Interaction Between Employed By Design And Start-Up By Design: Chung-Hung Lin, Ying-Pin Cheng

184

An Employee Training Program Of Hypermarkets In Taiwan Using QFD Based Fuzzy Linear Programming Method: Long-Hui Chen, Yueh-Li Chen, Chien-Yu Huang, I-Chiang Wang

200

The Effect Of Resource Characteristics On Organizational Learning Mechanisms And Routes - Evidence From Taiwan: Hsin-Mei Lin, Peng-Jung Lin

211

Research On Athlete Endorsement, Consumer Involvement And Advertising Effects: Chao-Sen Wu

223

Integrated Environmental Indicators In Developing Watershed Rural Communities: Kai-Min Wang, Yii-Der You


2

INFORMATION REGARDING

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION The International Journal of Organizational Innovation (IJOI) (ISSN 1943-1813) is an international, blind peer-reviewed journal, published quarterly. It may be viewed online for free. (There are no print versions of this journal; however, the journal .pdf file may be downloaded and printed.) It contains a wide variety of research, scholarship, educational and practitioner perspectives on organizational innovation-related themes and topics. It aims to provide a global perspective on organizational innovation of benefit to scholars, educators, students, practitioners, policy-makers and consultants. All past issues of the journal are available on the journal website. For information regarding submissions to the journal, go to the journal homepage: http://www.ijoi-online.org/ Submissions are welcome from the members of IAOI and other associations & all other scholars and practitioners. Student papers are also welcome. To Contact the IJOI Editor, email: [email protected] Note: The format for this Journal has changed with the January, 2013 issue. The journal is now published in a two-column format (instead of the single column format used in prior issues). Please see the new author guidelines on the Journal’s website, as well as a sample article showing how they will appear in the new format. For more information on the International Association of Organizational Innovation, go to: http://www.iaoiusa.org


3

JULY 2 – 4, 2013 HUA HIN, THAILAND The Seventh Annual (2013) International Conference on Organizational Innovation (ICOI) will be held July 2 -4, 2013. To obtain complete information on the conference and to register for the conference, hotel, tours and events, go to: http://www.iaoiusa.org/2013icoi/index.html The conference registration fee includes all conference materials, all refreshment breaks, 2 lunches and the Annual Dinner on the first night of the conference (This will be held beachside at the conference hotel!) The conference will be held at the Hilton Hua Hin Resort & Spa, which is offering a special rate for the 2013ICOI conference participators - $100USD/ per room per day, which also includes breakfast. All rooms have sea view. However, in order to receive the special conference rate for the hotel, you will need pay to Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University (if you pay Hilton will be charged USD: $170). For booking the conference hotel room - participants have to inform Dr. Charles Shieh on the registration form and provide the following information: (names of guests, passport numbers, dates and time of check in/out). On arrival at the conference, participants will pay for their room accommodation in cash (Thai baht) to the conference organizers at the co0nference registration desk in the hotel lobby. Participants can stay as long as they want (at same room rate). The University will also arrange a tour of Santorini Park on July 3 and a day Trip to Bangkok with a visitation of Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University, and sightseeing on July 4. Conference participants need to register for these tours when registering for the conference. All conference events will be held at Hilton Hua Hin Resort and Spa 3 Naresdamri Road, Hua Hin, 77110, Thailand TEL: 66-32-538-999 Website: http://www3.hilton.com/en/hotels/thailand/hilton-hua-hin-resort-and-spaHHQHIHI/index.html Participants should arrange flights arriving into Bangkok anytime before July 1. The university wills arrange the minivan to pick the 2013ICOI conference participators from Bangkok to Hua Hin in July 1 - it is a 3 hours ride. For complete conference details, go to the conference website: http://www.iaoiusa.org/2013icoi/index.html or contact Dr. Charles Shieh, the Conference Coordinator: [email protected]


4

THE 2013 BOARD OF EDITORS Position:

Name - Affiliation:

Editor-In-Chief

Frederick L. Dembowski - International Association of Org. Innovation, USA

Associate Editor Associate Editor

Chich-Jen Shieh - International Association of Org. Innovation, Taiwan R.O.C. Kenneth E Lane - Southeastern Louisiana University, USA

Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor

Ahmed M Kamaruddeen - Universiti Sains Malaysia, Malaysia Alan E Simon - Concordia University Chicago, USA Aldrin Abdullah - Universiti Sains Malaysia, Malaysia Alex Maritz - Australian Grad. School of Entrepreneurship, Australia Andries J Du Plessis - Unitec New Zealand Anton de Waal - Swinburne University of Technology, Australia Asma Salman - American University in the Emirates, Dubai Barbara Cimatti - University of Bologna, Italy Ben Hendricks - Fontys University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands Carl D Ekstrom - University Of Nebraska at Omaha, USA Catherine C Chiang - Elon University, USA Chandra Shekar - American University of Antigua College of Medicine, Antigua Davorin Kralj - Institute for Cretaive Management, Slovenia, Europe Denis Ushakov - Northern Caucasian Academy of Public Services Donna S McCaw - Western Illinois University, USA Eloiza Matos - Federal Technological University of Paraná - Brazil Earl F Newby - Virginia State University, USA Fernando Cardoso de Sousa - Portuguese Association of Creativity and Innovation (APIC)), Portugal Fuhui Tong - Texas A&M University, USA Gloria J Gresham - Stephen F. Austin State University, USA Hassan B Basri - National University of Malaysia, Malaysia Henry T Burley - La Trobe University, Australia Hong-Cheng Liu - I-Shou University, Taiwan R.O.C. Ilias Said - Universiti Sains Malaysia, Malaysia Ileana Monteiro - Portuguese Association of Creativity and Innovation (APIC)), Portugal Ismael Abu-Jarad - Universiti Utara Malaysia Janet Tareilo - Stephen F. Austin State University, USA Jeffrey Oescher - Southeastern Louisiana University, USA Jian Zhang - Dr. J. Consulting, USA John W Hunt - Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, USA Julia N Ballenger - Texas A & M University - Commerce, USA Julius Ndumbe Anyu - University of the District of Columbia, USA Jun Dang - Xi'an International Studies University, P.R.C. China Jyh-Rong Chou - I-Shou University, Taiwan R.O.C.

Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor Assistant Editor


5

Assistant Editor Ken Kelch - Alliant International University, USA Assistant Editor Ken Simpson - Unitec, New Zealand Assistant Editor Kerry Roberts - Stephen F. Austin State University, USA Assistant Editor Madeline Berma - Universiti Kebangsaan, Malaysia Assistant Editor Marcia L Lamkin - University of North Florida, USA Assistant Editor Marius Potgieter - Tshwane University of Technology, South Africa Assistant Editor Mei-Ju Chou, Shoufu University - Taiwan R.O.C. Assistant Editor Michelle Williams - Stephen F. Austin State University, USA Assistant Editor Michael A Lane - University of Illinois Springfield, USA Assistant Editor Muhammad Abduh - University of Bengkulu, Indonesia Assistant Editor Nathan R Templeton - Stephen F. Austin State University, USA Assistant Editor Noor Mohammad, Faculty of Law - Universiti Kebangsaan, Malaysia Assistant Editor Nor'Aini Yusof - Universiti Sains Malaysia, Malaysia Assistant Editor Opas Piansoongnern - Shinawatra University, Thailand Assistant Editor Pattanapong Ariyasit - Sripatum University Assistant Editor Pawan K Dhiman - EDP & Humanities, Government Of India Assistant Editor Ralph L Marshall - Eastern Illinois University, USA Assistant Editor Ray Thompson - Texas A&M University-Commerce. USA Assistant Editor Richard Cohen - International Journal of Organizational Innovation, USA Assistant Editor Ridong Hu - Huaqiao University, P. R. China Assistant Editor Ronnie Coutinho - AUA School of Medicine, Antigua, West Indies Assistant Editor Sandra Stewart - Stephen F. Austin State University, USA Assistant Editor Sergey Ivanov - University of the District of Columbia, USA Assistant Editor Shang-Pao Yeh - I-Shou University, Taiwan R.O.C. Assistant Editor Shanshi Liu - South China University of Technology, Taiwan R.O.C. Assistant Editor Sheng-Wen Hsieh - Far East University, Taiwan R.O.C. Assistant Editor Stacy Hendricks - Stephen F. Austin State University, USA Assistant Editor Thomas A Kersten - Roosevelt University, USA Assistant Editor Thomas C Valesky - Florida Gulf Coast University, USA Assistant Editor Tung-Yu Tsai - Taiwan Cooperative Bank, Taiwan R.O.C. Assistant Editor Wen-Hwa Cheng - National Formosa University, Taiwan R.O.C. Assistant Editor Yung-Ho Chiu - Soochow University, Taiwan R.O.C. Assistant Editor Zach Kelehear - University of South Carolina, USA


6

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS: A PERSPECTIVE OF KNOWLEDGE SPIRAL Wei-Li Wu Department of International Business Chien Hsin University of Science and Technology, R. O. C. Taiwan [email protected] Yi-Chih Lee* Department of International Business Chien Hsin University of Science and Technology, R. O. C. Taiwan *Corresponding Author: [email protected] Hui-Shing Shu Department of International Business Chien Hsin University of Science and Technology, R. O. C. Taiwan

Abstract In recent years, the issue of knowledge management has gained more and more attention in management field. Organizations have desired the attainment of a faultless knowledge management mechanism so as to promote knowledge transfer and creation within organizations, thereby achieving a competitive advantage. Although researchers have previously studied on this topic, research regarding how educational organizations effectively utilize knowledge management skills to strengthen their organizational capability and promote innovative teaching skills is far from enough. The main task of an educational organization is to pass on knowledge to learners. The tutors (front line teachers) are knowledge workers who need to absorb large amounts of information in order to build up the basis for knowledge creation. This study applied the case-study method to interview and observation members of an educational organization. And, this study also adopted the knowledge spiral of Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), using this theoretical perspective to explore the knowledge transfer and creation process of an educational organization. The result of this study indicated that innerorganizational knowledge flow can be obtained through the members’ mutual interaction and sharing, thereby strengthening the organization and its individual teaching skills. Moreover, in this study, we also pointed out the role of different knowledge workers in the educational organizations. Key Words: knowledge management, knowledge spiral, educational organizations


7

Introduction In a knowledge-based society, knowledge workers are a major asset of an organization (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995; Wu, Yeh and Hung, 2012; Wang, Chiang and Tung, 2012). In educational organizations, the tutors (knowledge workers) are mainly responsible for passing on and transferring knowledge and those who are learned are mainly students. This study argued that the source of knowledge in educational organizations is developed from interactions between tutors and those students, with teaching skills as the main product. Nevertheless, due to the extension and development of teaching skills, there is a need to accumulate and integrate abundant and relevant knowledge and teaching experience. There is, however, little literature on educational organizations from the aspect of how to facilitate the skills of knowledge management to achieve the improvement of teaching techniques. Therefore, this study took the case study method, through interviewing the organization’s members and undertaking in-depth observations, to analyze knowledge management practices in an educational organization. Moreover, this study apply the knowledge spiral theory of Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) to further explore organizational members’ roles and positioning during the process of knowledge transfer and creation, and how organizations can strengthen the members’ professional competencies through knowledge transfer so as to build their innovative teaching skills. The discussion of knowledge transfer and creation in organizations is mainly based on the knowledge spiral theory proposed by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995). This theory emphasized the fact that interaction between colleagues is the main source of knowledge acquisition for organizational members, indicat-

ing that organizational members’ individual tacit knowledge is enlarged within organizations through four knowledge transformation modes, namely, externalization, socialization, internalization, and combination, becoming higher-level knowledge ontology. The exploration of knowledge spirals places the emphasis on the exchange between explicit and tacit knowledge, which are the processes of knowledge transfer and creation. According to the nature of nowledge, it can be divided into two aspects, tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge (Polanyi, 1966; Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). “Tacit knowledge” refers to the information and related data belonging to the knowledge workers’ personal experience and techniques. It cannot be clearly expressed by words, language or figures, and only exists in the experience and skills of individuals. “Explicit knowledge” refers to the knowledge produced through codifying or digitizing in accordance with understood information or highly repeated information. In other words, explicit knowledge is information that can be verbalized, textualized, and structurally organized, and relates to clear conceptual knowledge that can be verbally passed on or printed in journals, magazines, and textbooks. Furthermore, the generation of organizational knowledge has to be through member interaction, thus intertwining explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge so as to develop a kind of understandable and usable knowledge. The knowledge spiral theory indicated four types of fundamental modes for the intertwining and transformation of knowledge: externalization, socialization, internalization, and combination. (1) Socialization: This refers to knowledge that arouses resonance and the process of creating


8

tacit knowledge through experience sharing. According to Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), socialization is achieved through three steps, namely, observation, mutual imitation and reflection. Davenport and Prusak (1998) emphasized that the best mode for transferring tacit knowledge is through the interaction and communication between people. Chen (2006) also indicated that the application of such spiral theory in a teaching environment is when, through informal patterns, such as experience sharing and the "open house" activities of schools, etc., an individual’s tacit knowledge, which belongs to knowledge workers alone, can be shared with other knowledge workers, thereby exerting an unconscious influence. (2) Externalization: This refers to the generation of conceptualized knowledge, and equates to the clear presentation of tacit knowledge with linguistic or word forms. In the past, scholars emphasized that an organization’s members should be offered communication space at this stage, allowing organizational members to express their personal opinions or experience on a specific theme in order to achieve the purpose of knowledge creation (Nonaka & Konno, 1998). Also, the externalization of tacit knowledge is a means of substantiating an individual’s tacit knowledge through group interaction and brain storming so as to obtain new concepts as the source of innovative knowledge (Chen, 2006). (3) Combination: This is the generation of systematic knowledge, which means systemizing developed conceptions and integrating them into the knowledge system. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) pointed out that explicit knowledge can be acquired via different channels, such as documents, conferences, Internet and emails. After being classified and organized, knowl-

edge will be preserved and combined to form new systematic knowledge. (4) Internalization: Internalization refers to the transformation of explicit knowledge, or concepts, into substantial personal experience and practices. This is the generation of operational knowledge and normally takes place in the process of work. These stand for the tacit knowledge and are generally processed through learning by doing. In other words, with learning by doing in the practices, knowledge workers have an in-depth learning and understanding of external explicit knowledge. Following this, with the integration of their personal practice experience, they will internalize the knowledge they have learned into the individual mind. According to the knowledge spiral theory, the creation of organizational knowledge is considered to be a set of spirals which spreads from individuals, groups and to organizations, and to interorganizations in which the scope of knowledge is expanded through organizational interactions. Additionally, the overlapped knowledge is regarded as the basis for the further and common creation of knowledge. Moreover, as the organizational members' communication grows to be more frequent, it will be more helpful for the passing on of highly tacit knowledge and for promoting the development of new knowledge in order to develop the think tank for organizational knowledge. Case study This study is mainly based on a qualitative research and adopts the research method of case study to explore the knowledge transfer and creation of an educational organization. For the confidential reason and required by interviewees, the case organization’s name is not revealed to the public and is called KYC


9

instead. The major information with regard to the case organization is taken from the organization’s official website, publications and interview with the employees. This study uses the purposive sampling method to proceed with a nonstructural interview in the case organization. The initiator of KYC is a Japanese math professor. Through individual teaching experiences, the initiator of KYC continuously creates and modified a series of teaching materials, finally completing a whole set of sequential teaching materials. In 1973, an initiator in Taiwan learned about this educational method and went to Japan to receive professional training. In 1979, he integrated the learned educational method, ideas, and the concept of parental education to formally promote such an educational system. The teaching materials for this method are a set of systematically sequential materials suitable for learners of different levels. Today, over 4,100,000 learners in more than 40 countries are involved and devoted to the promotion of this kind of educational method. In terms of the organizational scope in Taiwan, there are nine liaisons from the north to south part of Taiwan, which are, respectively, responsible for the tutors' research and learning activities, administrative works, as well as the supply of teaching materials, in these areas. The human resources in each area include tutors, district administrators, section managers and the director, etc; the human resources in corporate headquarter include CEOs, general managers and associate managers, and top management levels. The tutors are located in different countries/cities and are organized and assisted by district administrators. On the other hand, the transmission of information regarding the status of the organizations and tutors are taken care of by mid-

level managers, who are also the district administrators. Therefore, the whole organization is a typical “middle-to-upper-to-lower” hierarchical management mode, with the advantage that the communication from mid-level management can help to avoid the direct conflict between high-level management and the lower-level personnel. The main research objects of this study are tutors who are mainly marketers of parental education; and at any moment, could readjust and lead the study of learners in the process by observing the learners' study and assignments. The major competitive advantages of the educational organization in this study are that the tutors can cultivate the learners' self-study and habitual independent thinking patterns through the teaching mode. This places the emphasis on learners’ individual study and competence aspects, thereby succeeding in excelling the yearly study goals. This teaching mode is totally different from that which exists after class tutoring patterns, which are inclined to be passively educational learning. Depending on the classification of Davenport and Prusak (1998), this study divided the knowledge worker of KYC into three types, namely: knowledge management workers, managers of knowledge projects and the chief knowledge officer according to their different roles, such as the knowledge management workers responsible for fundamental works, the managers of knowledge projects responsible for middle-level management, and the chief knowledge officer in charge of whole managerial activities. The knowledge management workers of educational organizations are the tutors who are the professional knowledge staff within the organization and are responsible for the development


10

of teaching skills and knowledge accumulation. The district administrators are the mid-level management team who play the role of managers of knowledge projects and who are responsible for knowledge exploration and being the communicators within the organization. The top management team within the organization is responsible for integrating a higher level of strategic decisions. Choosing Taiwan KYC as the case study, this research interviewed eight tutors whose job seniority was either less than five years or between 10 and 20 years, and one district administrator. The interviewing content is mainly about the setting up of the training course for the organization and the focus of the interviews are on how courses are set up and how, after the set-up, the organization provides a related process and content for its employees. This explorative study is conducted via observation and field participation and further to analyze and descript the roles and positions of knowledge workers through the case study. Additionally, we apply knowledge spiral theory to illustrate knowledge transfer and creation within the case organization so as to discover a valid way of speeding up the development of knowledge. The knowledge transfer and creation in knowledge spiral process According to Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), the knowledge spiral process can be divided into four stages; namely, socialization, externalization, combination and internalization. Knowledge transfer and creation happens in each of the stage. For academy research, we can somehow be clearly to argue that knowledge transfer and creation are two different concepts; however, in practice, knowledge transfer and creation usually happens simultaneously in each of the above four stages. Therefore, in the following case analysis, we do not be especially to dis-

tinguish the difference between knowledge transfer and knowledge creation. Socialization (transform tacit knowledge into tacit knowledge). Socialization is the process of transforming individual tacit knowledge into group tacit knowledge. Using internship training activities within the classrooms, regular study and learning activities, and district conferences/workshops, KYC places the emphasis on interactive learning, the higher degree of feedback on communications, the higher level of knowledge sharing among colleagues. Through learning by doing, tutors can have consensus and consonance via the sharing of their experiences; it leads to a great effectiveness of knowledge transfer. The work contracts of the tutors of the case organization are reviewed once a year. In order to guarantee the learners' privilege for study, the credit system is employed by the organization and the tutors are required to periodically pursue further education in order to update their knowledge system and extensively improve their teaching skills. The tutors are also required to complete 36 credits within the first five years and 24 credits after five years. Moreover, KYC irregularly arranges a variety of professional lectures and each lecture accounts for one credit. The delivery of a lecture is a knowledge exchange field, in which tutors within the organization will work on the knowledge transfer together. The major content of the study of tutors include communication skills, workshops run by professional, tutoring on the topic of business operations, and guides on the editing of the teaching materials. With district conferences and workshops, annual knowledge sharing activities and annual meetings enhance interactions and the sharing of experiences between peo-


11

ple. At the same time, the professional workshops also increase the information flow from outside of the organization. Externalization (transform tacit into explicit knowledge). Although tacit knowledge is valuable, it tends to be concealed and is hard to find and transfer. It is only when knowledge has been shared between members and the managers of knowledge projects have analyzed and organized highly repetitive knowledge, can such tacit knowledge be transformed into written materials. The district administrators (managers of knowledge projects) of KYC work to observe the operational process in each tutor room in order to analyze the advantages and disadvantages and, as a routine, put forward these points for members to discuss, modify, or self-examine. In this way, we can know that the major function of district administrator is to discover and raise problems as the starting point for the tutors to externalize their tacit knowledge. In this stage, tutors are encouraged to externalize their tacit knowledge. Some more concrete knowledge could then be generated, like child tutoring handbook and special child tutoring.

externalization and then the formed explicit knowledge is transformed into a handbook or instructional manuals. The manuals are then delivered to the knowledge management team/managers by district administrator. In this way, the valid technological and experiential knowledge is edited into handbooks as the basis for the development or modification of teaching materials in the future. Moreover, these handbooks are provided to the entrants as the most available technological guide. Internalization (transformation from explicit into tacit knowledge). In the process of training, to transfer the existing organizational explicit knowledge to the entrants, allowing it to become the individual's tacit knowledge. As the explicit knowledge tends to be the fastest available experiential knowledge after combination, this case organization, when training newcomers, facilitates the given knowledge tank, using such explicit knowledge as a handbook, tutor guidebook, and teaching manuals, to transfer the required knowledge to the newcomers. In addition, the knowledge transfer at this stage can become a new starting point for the knowledge workers' personal development. Conclusion

Combination (transform explicit knowledge into explicit knowledge). In this stage, the explicit knowledge is conceptualized, textualized and structured, so that the knowledge can be disclosed within the organization and treated as the substance of important knowledge for transfer. It can then be further reorganized and applied so as to achieve a new depth or width of knowledge, or the creation of new knowledge. The educational organization of this study produces a variety of explicit knowledge through socialization and

In different stages of the knowledge spiral, we can clearly discover that organizations have different focuses, which can allow smoother knowledge transfer and creation. In KYC, tutors are the main knowledge management workers, and responsible for the first-line’ teaching jobs. Therefore, how to help tutors effectively accumulate knowledge assets through various human resources management systems has become an important subject. With this case study, we can see that excellent educational training, conference and workshop systems, and


12

formal or informal social interactions, can all have a positive influence on knowledge transfer between tutors. Additionally, it can be clearly noted that tutors are the major sources of knowledge creation in the organization so the organization can achieve a more perfect teaching system by analyzing the teaching experience of their tutors in different areas. In such a knowledge creation process, the district administrators play a significant, mediating role, whose key job is to effectively explore and integrate the heterogeneous knowledge possessed by the tutors. Then, using this knowledge as a basis, we can produce new items of knowledge. Finally, this study also finds that KYC failed to effectively utilize external expert knowledge in its process of internal knowledge creation. In fact, the introduction of external expert knowledge helps to supplement and reinforce the existing internal knowledge, thereby enhancing the production of new knowledge (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990; Wu and Lee, 2012). Generally speaking, the top management team of KYC should play a more active role in introducing external expert knowledge.

References Chen, M. (2006). Teacher Learning and Professional Development the Perspective of Tacit Knowledge. Curriculum & Instruction Quarterly , 9(3), 1-13. (In Chinese)

Davenport, T. H. & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Nonaka, I. & Konno, N. (1998). The concept of “Ba”: building a foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40-54. Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company. New York: Oxford University Press. Polanyi, M. 1966. The tacit dimension. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Wang, K.L., Chiang, C. & Tung, C.M. (2012). Integrating Human Resource Management and Knowledge Management: From the Viewpoint Of Core Employees and Organizational Performance. The International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 5(1), 109-137. Wu, W.L. & Lee, Y.C. (2012). Enhancing international knowledge transfer through information technology: The intervention of communication culture. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology, 4(1), 1-12. Wu, W.L., Yeh, R.S. & Hung, H.K. (2012). Knowledge sharing and work performance: A network perspective. Social Behavior and Personality, 40(7), 1113 -1120.

Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128-152. The International Journal of Organizational Innovation Vol 5 Num 4 April 2013

13

RETHINKING THE FUTURE OF LEARNING: THE POSSIBILITIES AND LIMITATIONS OF TECHNOLOGY IN EDUCATION IN THE 21ST CENTURY Raysa Leer School of Business and Public Administration University of the District of Columbia, USA [email protected] Sergey Ivanov School of Business and Public Administration University of the District of Columbia, USA [email protected]

Abstract Many scholars agree that the way we carry out the task of educating learners needs to be reexamined. Understanding that the process of education needs to change is different from knowing how best to help effect that change. Recurrent themes in education reform include such topics as student centric learning and the need to use technology to assist with the learning process. This paper will discuss how technology can assist in student centric learning, considering potential future educational innovations while being mindful of technology's limitations, and noting the need for educational systemic reform that will support successful technological instruction in the 21st century. Key Words: Education, Education Technology, Educational Change, Educational Reform, Futures, Innovation, Postsecondary Education, Technology


14

Introduction Many scholars agree that the way we carry out the task of educating learners needs to change (Christensen, Johnson, & Horn, 2010; Kaku, 2012; Bach, 2012; Facer & Sandford, 2010). As Facer & Sandford (2010) noted, “Around the world, there are foundations, publicprivate partnerships, government initiatives and commercial entities leading calls for a redesign of '21st century education'.” (p. 75). The “Why?” behind this call is becoming more obvious as the years pass. Kaku (2012) has declared that intellectual capital will be essential for those seeking to meet the challenges of the twenty first century, allowing them to fill jobs for skilled workers that, even with technological advancements, humans will still be needed to do (pp. 366 369). At the same time, Bach (2012) noted that there are many factors poised to reshape the world of education. He cites technology, global debt, demographic change, rapid urbanization, natural resource constraints and the geographic shift of economic power as change agents that will restructure education (p. 20). As he stated, “I believe that each driver of change has the potential to cripple schools and programs – and the equal potential to bring about renewal, transformation, and new value creation” (p. 20). Understanding that education needs to change is different from knowing how best to help effect that change. Two continuous themes seem to appear in discussions on reforming and rethinking education. The first has to do with how students learn and the way education is presented to them. Christensen, Johnson & Horn (2010) pointed out that “Every student learns in a different way … A key step toward making school intrinsically motivating is to customize education to match the way each child best learns”

(pp. 10 11). They described this as student centric learning (p. 11). The second theme has to do with technology, particularly the need to use it in specific ways to assist in effective learning. The “edtech” (education technology) field brings together experts in education and technology to examine the multiple ways technology can create more efficient, effective, sustainable models of education. Technology in education includes everything from online learning (also e learning or distance learning) to virtual reality and all the future possibilities that have yet to arrive on the market. This paper discusses these two themes connected to educational reform and presents some possibilities related to how the second point may have great bearing on the first. It will posit potential future technological innovations in education while being mindful of technology's limitations and the need for educational systemic reform that will support successful technological instruction in the 21st century. Disruptive, Student Centric Learning and How Students Learn To fully understand disruptive, student centric learning as described by Christensen, Johnson & Horn (2012), one must first understand the current structure of education in the United States. They added, “Today’s system was designed at a time when standardization was seen as a virtue. It is an intricately interdependent system” (p. 38). In such a system, when someone makes changes to a portion of the interdependent system, it is necessary to make complementary changes to the rest of the system. This makes customization within the system, such as customized student learning in education, costly. Therefore, in our interdependent school systems, it makes more


economic sense to standardize student instruction and assessment as much as possible (pp. 31, 34). What Christensen, Johnson & Horn (2012) have argued is that because students learn in different ways, the monolithic, standardized approach to education does not serve students well. The key to “every student learning in a different way” has to do with learners having multiple intelligences. It is not simply about “how” you learn but what things you “know”. As Deresiewicz (2008) observed, there are many forms of intelligence beyond the highly valued analytic intelligence, such as social intelligence, emotional intelligence and creative ability. Unfortunately, teaching to multiple intelligences can prove very problematic. While a truly customized twenty first century educational experience may be some ways off in the United States, technology is providing a path toward that vision. Computer based learning is already changing education, “emerging as a disruptive force and a promising opportunity” (Christensen, Johnson & Horn, 2012, p. 38). How Technology May Change Education To understand where technology may take us, it is crucial to have an understanding of the current trends in education related to technology. Technology, in many institutions of higher education, has become a part of college life (Goode, 2010). Students apply for college online, choose their courses online, read electronic text books, perform research online, complete homework assignments electronically and submit them via online learning management system software, review grades online, manage their student accounts and receive all university related communication through email. As Goode (2010) reported, already universi-

ties expect students to have a certain level of comfort with and skill related to technology in order to perform in these digital environments. The field of educational technology is expanding, and researchers now ask questions about where will technology take us in the decades to come. Driving the belief that technology will play a major role in human life in the future is the belief that computing power will continue to become cheaper to produce. Kaku (2012) stated, “Moore's law simply says that computer power doubles about every eighteen months” (p. 22). Facer and Sandford (2010) saw this as one of several scientific and technical trends that will drive change. Other trends include the likelihood of ubiquitous computing, engineering computers from biological material (bioscience), psychopharmacology (cognitive enhancement or smart drugs), and “invasive and non invasive brain machine interfaces – enabling prosthetic enhancement and externalizing cognitive functions to external devices” (p. 80). The last trend, said another way, speaks to the possibility of wiring hardware to your brain or connecting to the hardware without surgical grafting to allow enhanced learning and thought – one small step shy of students' historic desire to learn the material in their textbooks by osmosis while napping on them. Nevertheless, the authors cautioned that “despite the continued demand for quick fixes, neuroscience, computing and bioscience are not expected to provide easy solutions to educational issues over the coming two decades” (p. 85). They did agree, however, that current trends (such as a looming scarcity of financial resources) point to it being unlikely that the process of education can continue to be done in the same way for much longer. It becomes increasingly more


16

apparent that educational institutions as we know them may morph into entirely different entities or may disappear altogether. Technology, while not a silver bullet, will allow education to expand beyond the formal classroom and into the society that learners interact with every day (pp. 86 87). Along with scientific developments and technological innovations, educators must also contend with increased societal concern about environmentally sustainable products and services. Bach (2012) suggested that constrained natural resources will require a “greening” of postsecondary institutional operations. Part of this effort to decrease schools' environmental footprint will certainly include consideration for how student travel impacts the environment, which becomes an excellent driver for increased focus on online education and distance learning. In the future, students may not only take all their courses online but may do this while engaging in other activities. Mobile devices will become obsolete as students connect to the internet via glasses (Kaku, 2012, pp. 27 30) or the walls (pp. 34 35) or in virtual reality (pp. 37 39). Already virtual reality is being employed by educators to assist students in having a deeper understanding on how theoretical problems are solved in real world examples. Abulrub, Attridge and Williams (2011) reminded us that virtual reality is already used in military training, automotive and aerospace design, medical training and entertainment. It is not hard to imagine a world where virtual worlds are used to teach English concepts and general math problems. Anthropologists and sociologists could practice ethnographic interviews in virtual settings with people from anywhere else in the world or via specially designed software programs. Foreign language students could immerse themselves

among speakers of Spanish, Chinese or Farsi for hours at a time. History students could step into elaborately created models of ancient civilizations' cities, reconstructed to appear as they would have looked during the height of their glory. Speech class could be performed in front of virtual audiences to help students calm their nerves and prepare them to speak to live audiences. In the years ahead, artists and musicians could create masterpieces in virtual worlds by thought alone. Brick and mortar facilities will gravitate from functioning as housing for classrooms and offices to multi functional, collaboration spaces. Faculty members will operate in swing spaces, meeting with students face to face and working closely with intra and interdepartmental colleagues while taking advantage of additional time outside the classroom to collaborate with other academics on critical research, program development, curriculum creation, and other varied projects. Students will gather for group work and to interact live while at the same time perhaps connecting with absent group members via the walls of their study cubes. Hallways will relay key institutional messages that are also pushed out the a student's glasses or study cube walls or even their virtual realities, in the case of the latter causing students to recall and connect with the real world again. Implementing student centric education in conjunction with possible future advances in technology may help education institutions do away with rigid class time requirements and allow students to have more time for meaningful projects and research with fellow classmates and professors. These predictions may seem like flights of fancy, yet scientific and technical trends are showing that what was


17

once considered science fiction is ever closer to becoming reality. These technological innovations have the potential to completely disrupt the educational experience. Academics, however, must remember that technology is a tool, not a goal. Giving new knowledge to individuals, which allows them to gain specific competencies and skills while completing their personal educational goals, is the primary purpose of education. Technology can be an incredibly powerful tool in assisting students to learn in a way that suits them best, but administrators must be careful not to give greater priority to having technology than to using it effectively. Bennett and Oliver (2011) noted that while a great amount of funding has been directed toward the purchase of technology little research has been done on the “patchy and inconsistent patterns of use that typically follow such investment” (p. 180). It is clear that many administrators feel that “to have is to do”. Without careful consideration of how technology fits into the larger institutional goals around education, technology will never reach the full potential outlined above. The Limitations of Technology in Education "...Although people have spent billions of dollars putting computers into U.S. schools, it has resulted in little change in how students learn... ...A class does not look all that different from the way it did a couple of decades earlier, with the exception that banks of computers line the walls of many classrooms. Lecturing, group discussions, small group assignments and projects, and the occasional video or over head are still the norms. Computers

have not increased student centered learning and project based teaching practices...Computers have made almost no dent in the most important challenge that they have the potential to crack: allowing students to learn in ways that correspond with how their brains are wired to learn, thereby migrating to a student centric learning environment." (Christensen, Johnson & Horn, 20102, pp. 65, 83 84). As the authors above lamented, adding technology to traditional education models will not automatically bring about the types of educational reforms and advancements desired to help students successfully complete their educational goals. Technology is only as good as the humans that develop it, and while great scientific and technological advances are being created all the time, the human brain is still better at critical thinking and complex communication than any machine yet made (Christensen, Johnson & Horn, 2012, p. 68). Furthermore, simply adopting various technological education models within traditional curriculum does not guarantee success. Highlighting the theme of technology only being useful when it helps meet students' learning needs, Bickerstaff & Monroe Ellis (2012) have stated that “no innovation can result in significant student gains without continuous attention to the process of implementation” and that in the course of examining this process educators must link what is happening in the classroom with student needs (p. 1). It does no good to install technology into systems and classes without first having a firm understanding of whether the chosen approach will produce the desired results. Again,


18

having technology is not the goal; rather, understanding students' challenges and meeting students' learning needs so that they can be successful must be the goal of all education faculty and administrators. Technology may be a part of the process, but it is not the process itself. Technology can only improve an educational system that is changing comprehensively. Technology by itself will not make the difference placed in our current educational system. As Garrison (2011) observed, “The greatest mistake is to try to integrate new communications technology into passive educational approaches . . . We must be prepared to rethink current dominant approaches and be clear about what type of learning experiences we wish to design” (p. 1). At the same time educators focus on incorporating technology into their educational strategies, they must be mindful of students’ responses to new technology in education. Not all students have experience or are comfortable with using technology in its various forms. They have different attitudes towards and motivations for using technology (Goode, 2010). Students who do not use technology regularly either because of lack of access, interest or pre-post secondary digital curricular experiences – are potentially disadvantaged academically and this can be especially true for low income students, racial minorities and females (Goode, 2010, p. 584). Goode (2010) reported “students with the lowest levels of technological proficiency actually avoid courses with heavy technology components, while the techiest students reap the academic and social rewards, including time and money, of knowing about technology” (p. 615). In order for students to fully reap the benefits of digital learning, digital

literacy issues must be taken into account earlier in education and addressed before a student finds them selves at an academic disadvantage during their postsecondary years. Conclusion It is clear that for the United States to remain competitive in the century going forward, it will need to rethink its strategy for educating its citizens. The current standardized models of education do not serve our students well, allowing few to have to true access to education and comprehension of the subject matter. Education must be designed to match the reality that students learn in different ways and have different learning needs. To this end, technology is arguably one of the best tools to use to reach this goal. Computer based learning can provide students with the freedom to access information in a flexible environment and to connect with that information in different ways as best suits their learning style. It is a tool that allows for customized instruction in a more cost effective and efficient manner than in class instruction.

Technological and scientific trends point to great changes on the horizon, with technology becoming progressively cheaper to produce. The impact of these trends on education could be significant as students find ways to use technology outside the traditional classroom. While educational institutions will most likely face financial challenges in the future, technology presents a cost effective option for colleges and universities looking to provide students with access to education in a flexible way that also fits their learning style. Various innovative technologies may allow students to connect with their course work not only via computers but on the go via accessories like glasses or on the smart walls or even in virtual reality. The International Journal of Organizational Innovation Vol 5 Num 4 April 2013 19

Technology is only a tool, however, and for education to truly change the entire standardized structure must be rethought to allow students to not only gain education through new computer based learning methods but also to interact with education on a personal level that translates into true learning and retention. This can only be achieved by all college stakeholders examining where student learning challenges lie and taking the appropriate steps to provide reforms that specifically addresses those needs. Technology has the potential to drastically change education, but systemic reform is required for technology to be used in a meaningful way, which will allow students to truly be prepared for the requirements of a twenty first century knowledge driven global society.

how disruptive innovation will change the way the world learns (2nd ed.). McGraw Hill. Deresiewicz, W. (2008, Summer). The disadvantages of an elite education. Retrieved November 4, 2012, from The American Scholar: http://theamericanscholar.org/the disadvantages of an elite education/ Facer, K. K., & Sandford, R. R. (2010). The next 25 years?: future scenarios and future directions for education and technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26 (1), 74 93. doi:10.1111/j.1365 2729.2009.00337.x Garrison, D. R. (2011). E learning in the 21st century: a framework for research and practice (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

References Adulrub, A. G., Attridge, A. A., & Williams, M. A. (2011). Virtual reality in engineering education: the future of creative learning. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 6 (4), 71 78. Bach, D. (2012, September/October). We need to rethink...everything. BizEd, 18 24.

Goode, J. (2010, September/October). Mind the gap: the digital dimension of college access. The Journal of Higher Education, 81 (5), 583 618. Kaku, M. (2012). Physics of the future: how science will shape human destiny and our daily lives by the year 2100 (1st ed.). New York: Anchor Books.

Bennett, S., & Oliver, M. (2011). Talking back to theory: the missed opportunity in learning technology research. Research in Technology Learning, 19 (3), 179 189. Bickerstaff, S., & Monroe Ellis, M. (2012, April). Adoption and Adaptation: A Framework for Instructional Reform. Retrieved December 3, 2012, from Scaling Innovation: http://www.scalinginnovation.org/adop tion and adaptation/ Christensen, C. M., Johnson, C. W., & Horn, M. B. (2010). Disrupting class: The International Journal of Organizational Innovation Vol 5 Num 4 April 2013

20

THE INFLUENCE OF LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOR AND PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT ON JOB SATISFACTION

Li-Fen Lin Institute of Business Administration National Yunlin University of Science & Technology, Taiwan, R. O. C. g9322806@yuntech. edu.tw Chun-Chieh Tseng Southern Taiwan University of Technology, Taiwan, R. O. C.

Abstract The purpose of this study is to understand the current conditions of campus security work executives at Taiwan’s private universities. The study also explores the relationships between various related factors, including personal background, school background, leadership behavior, psychological empowerment and job satisfaction. Through the administration of a questionnaire survey to a random sample of campus security executives, the study determined that there is a positive correlation among the three variables of leadership behavior, psychological empowerment, and job satisfaction. Regression analysis shows that leadership behavior and psychological empowerment have a significant positive impact on job satisfaction, with psychological empowerment showing a stronger impact than leadership behavior. Key Words: Leadership Behavior, Psychological Empowerment, Job Satisfaction


21

Introduction A university campus belongs to the public domain. Every school has a different environment, set of demands, quality of staff and funding. The creation of a good learning environment for students is the primary focus of school safety issues nowadays. Therefore, the management of security on campus and the leadership behavior associated with it may affect the attitude and cognition of campus safety task execution staff. This behavior has a huge impact on the success or failure of the work and is one of the motivations of the present study. On the other hand, due to the joining of campus security and crisis management personnel, the features of the campus security organizations in Taiwan have undergone significant changes. These changes can lead to the variations in the characteristics of a work environment, such as uncertainty about, conflicts in the work, the positioning of roles and vague communication as well as the pressure placed on employees to avoid losing their jobs. These are common situations for campus safety task execution staff, and also produce all kinds of physical and psychological pressure. For this reason, this research undertakes to explore the impact of psychological empowerment and job satisfactions on university campus safety task execution staff. It explores the influence of the campus security executives on leadership behavior, psychological empowerment and job satisfaction variables under the difficult situation of maintaining campus security. This paper provides the conclusions and recommendations drawn from this study in the pursuit of maintaining campus safely. The main purposes of this research are as follows: (i). to understand the perceived leadership behavior, psychological

empowerment and job satisfaction status of the campus safety work executives at private universities in southern Taiwan (ii) to integrate the findings of the research and give recommendations to the campus safety task executives and references to researchers. Literature Review Psychological Empowerment Thomas and Velthouse (1990) described empowerment using the construct of intrinsic task motivation. They defined psychological empowerment as a set of four cognitions reflecting an employee’s orientation to his/her role in terms of meaning, competence, self-determination, and impact. Spreitzer (1995, 1996) subsequently developed a scale to assess these four dimensions. Psychological empowerment is also defined as a motivational construct that focuses on the cognitions of the individual being empowered (Spreitzer, 1995; Menon, 2001) and has been shows to play an important role in employees’ attitudes and performance (Thomas and Velthouse, 1990; Thomas and Tymon, 1994; Fulford and Enz, 1995; Spreitzer, 1995; Spreitzer, Kizilos and Nason, 1997; Kirkman and Rosen, 1999; Koberg, Boss, Senjem and Goodman, 1999; Menon, 2001). In sum, psychological empowerment is defined as a motivational construct manifested in four cognitions: meaning, competence, selfdetermination, and impact. Employees can derive significant benefits from experiences that enhance their personal awareness of the value of their work. These experiences will increase employees’ job satisfaction and upgrade their work performance (Koberg, Boss, Senjem & Goodman, 1999). Research related to this topic has shown that employees' psychological empowerment or feelings of self efficacy will exert positive effects on their job satisfaction


22

(Spence-Laschinger et al, 2004; Luthans et al, 2007). Fulford and Enz (1995) explored the impact of psychological empowerment activities on staff members of a club. They discovered that staff members’ awareness of psychological empowerment exerted a positive effect on their degree of job satisfaction. Kirkman and Rosen (1999) studied the impact of factors that may affect team psychological empowerment and psychological empowerment. The results of their research revealed that psychological empowerment of a team of private employees increased job satisfaction, organizational commitment and team commitment. Dewettinck et al. (2003) studied the impact of psychological empowerment on performance, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction. They found that the impact of psychological empowerment on job satisfaction is most apparent in low-level employees. Other scholars have studies the impact of psychological empowerment on job satisfaction research (see Bowen et al, 1992; Thomas & Tymon, 1994; Fulford & Enz and, 1995; Menom, 1995; Kirkman & Rosen, 1999; Eylon & Bamberger, 2000). These academic studies have shown that psychological empowerment can be positively correlated with job satisfaction. Thus, we have devised the first hypothesis: H1: Psychological empowerment will positively affect job satisfaction. Job Satisfaction Job satisfaction was defined by Locke (1976) as “a pleasure or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experience”. In addition to being satisfied or dissatisfied with various specific aspects of a particular job (such as pay, coworkers, leadership, and so on), employees can also have a general affective response to their jobs (Lucas, Babakus and Ingram, 1990; McFarlin and Rice, 1992).

Numerous researchers have concurred that job satisfaction is a consequence of psychological empowerment (Thomas and Tymon, 1994; Fulford and Enz, 1995; Menon, 1995; Kirkman and Rosen, 1999; Bishop, 2000; Eylon and Bamberger, 2000) and various components of psychological empowerment have been shown to be particularly associated with job satisfaction. These included (i) self efficacy (Liden, Wayne and Sparrowe, 2000; Walumbwa et al., 2003; Carless, 2004); (ii) meaning (Gorn and Kanungo, 1980; Spreitzer et al., 1997; Liden et al., 2000; Sparks and Schenk, 2001; Carless, 2004); (iii) goal internalization (Menon, 1995); and (iv) choice (Spector, 1986). Leadership Behavior Leadership behavior has a direct and matchless impact on the work environment, work outcomes and the success of organizations (Kritsonis, 2004). Many previous studies show that consideration of leadership behavior is positively related to employee job satisfaction, while a negative relationship has been reported between job satisfaction and initiation of structure leadership behavior (Greene & Schriesheim, 1977; House & Filley, 1971). However, other studies have found a negative relationship between consideration of leadership behavior of and job satisfaction (Hodge, 1976; Patchen, 1962). Some studies indicate that both consideration and initiation of structure leadership behavior are positively related to job satisfaction (Bartolo & Furlonger, 2000; Katerberg & Horne, 1981; Cristina et al., 2012). The results of previous studies from different countries show that different styles of leadership have different impacts on job satisfaction (Stogdill, 1970; Walder, 1995). The importance of leaders’ role in influencing employees’ behavior have been shown by previous studies (Asgari, Silong, Ahmad and Samah, 2008;


23

Bhal, Gulati and Ansari, 2009). Leadership style has been investigated for its relationship with various organizational variables such as innovative work behavior (Lee, 2008) and many more. A great deal of research has been conducted to examine the relationships that exist between leadership behavior and job satisfaction. Many studies have shown that the relationship between leadership behavior and job satisfaction can be positively correlated (House, Filley & Kerr, 1971; Szilagyi & Keller, 1976; Petty & Bruning, 1980; Yousef, 2000). Holdnak, Harsh and Busharadt (1993) found a significant positive correlation between compassionate leadership and job satisfaction. Based on the results of these previous studies, we devised the second hypothesis: H2: Leadership behavior will positively affect job satisfaction.

age for the Social Science). Analysis methods include reliability and validity analyses, Pearson correlation analysis, hierarchical regression analysis and so on. Operational Definition Of The Study Variables Leadership Behavior. As to the operational definition of leadership behavior, this study adopts Bass’s (1990) term “transformational leadership”, which is defined as the unique relationship between leaders and subordinates and which explains why the individual, team or large organization has an unexpected performance (Burn, 1978; House, 1977). Therefore, this study measures private university campus safety task executives’ degree of the consent to the leadership behavior of theirs supervisor, including Dean of Student Affairs or Directors of Military Education Office.

Methods Scope and Object of Study This study is aimed at campus safety task executives at private universities in the southern part of Taiwan, specifically military training instructors and the campus security crisis management staffs. It includes eight private universities, at which military training instructors and campus security crisis management personnel are used as sampling. The sample size of the study issued a total of 120 questionnaires. The major sampling subjects contain two levels of the military training instructors and school safety and crisis management personnel. And 88 questionnaires were received. After discounting invalid questionnaires, there were 84 valid questionnaires. The effective recovery rate was 70%. In this study, using the analysis tool statistical software SPSS (Statistical Pack-

The leadership behavior scale in this study is applied using the research tools from Cheng Yen-Mei’s (2003) empirical study, which is based on the MLQ Scale created by Bass and Avolio (1994). The scale was partially revised by the researchers for research purposes, including changes to campus security features and measurements of certain characteristics. It also extracts factors dimensions through the principal component factor analytic approach. After analysis, the data is divided into the three dimensions: stimulation pattern leadership, charismatic pattern leadership, and consideration pattern leadership. Psychological Empowerment. Spreitzer (1995) asserts that psychological empowerment is a task motivation that can increase the intrinsic part of the individual. Through personal evaluation and cognition of task significance, it enables individuals to take the initiative to


24

complete the organization's objectives. It aims to stimulate the intrinsic motivation of personnel, prompting the use of one’s abilities and elevating one’s willingness to serve the unit. Psychological empowerment is a concept that can give members of the unit power, freedom and information for decision making and participation in organizational affairs. This study refers to the concept of psychological empowerment proposed by Spreitzer (1995) who adopted the theory of Thomas and Velthouse (1990). From the point of view of management psychology, the present research sums up the view of the literature by conducting a psychological empowerment questionnaire with campus security work execution staff. The study is divided into four dimensions: impact, self-determination, competence, and meaning. The significance of its operational definition is as follows:

（i）Impact: The degree of influence that an individual has on the direct work environment.

（ii）Self-determination: The degree of

influence that an individual has on how the job can be performed. (iii) Competence: The extent to which an individual feels confident about his/her capability of performing the task. (iv) Meaning: The extent to which an individual experiences a task to be personally meaningful. Job Satisfaction Job satisfaction refers to workers who can balance satisfaction and dissatisfaction to from collective satisfaction. This study refers to the concept introduced by Wu Ching-Chi and Liao Suhua (1978), who adopted the notion of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ), a 20question scale compiled by Weiss, Davis, English

and Lofgurist (1967). The questionnaire encompasses five satisfaction factors: spirit, material, ability, service and leadership. The operational definition of each dimension is as follows: (1.) Spirit satisfaction refers to the development of the work and the satisfaction gained from appreciation won by work performance. (2.) Material satisfaction refers to salary, income and material rewards. (3.) Ability satisfaction refers to the degree of control and expertise that employees have in their work, including the moral value of the work itself. (4.) Service satisfaction refers to the satisfaction in customer service, including the opportunities present by the work itself, and the satisfaction of being evaluated. (5.) Leadership satisfaction refers to the ability to be a leader in one’s work and the strength of one’s guiding ability. After designing and measuring the characteristics of the campus security organization, the researchers consolidated these factors into three dimensions: (i) opportunity and material satisfaction (ii) service and spirit satisfaction and (iii) leadership satisfaction. Results and Discussion Reliability and Validity Analyses After a factor analysis was conducted, a reliability analysis was carried out in order to understand the reliability and validity of the research questionnaire. Reliability refers to the consistency and stability of the test results. A high reliability coefficient represents the high stability and reliability of the test, and anticipates more consistent results. Yang Shiying (2007) points out that in the practice of the SPSS statistical analysis, if Cronbach’s alpha


25

coefficient is higher than 0. 7, the reliability has a fairly good consistency. In this study, the reliability analysis results of the questionnaire are as follows: Cronbach’s alpha for the research variables leadership behavior, psychological empowerment, and job satisfaction and relevant dimensions were higher than 0. 721, which indicates that the scale has good reliability, and convergent validity dimensions were greater than 50% showing that the attributes of this research questionnaire are within a reasonable range. Pearson Correlation Analysis In order to further test the degree of correlation between the research variables and the validity dimensions, this research examines leadership behavior, psychological empowerment, and job satisfaction through person correlation coefficient statistical methods, in order to observe whether or not there is a significant positive correlation existing between the three variables. The correlation coefficient of leadership behavior and psychological empowerment is 0. 246; the correlation coefficient of leadership behavior and job satisfaction is 0. 522; and the correlation coefficient of psychological empowerment and job satisfaction is 0. 739. There is a visible positive correlation between the three variables. The intensity of the correlation of psychological empowerment and job satisfaction is the strongest with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0. 739. Hence the higher the identity to psychological empowerment of the campus security work executive, the higher the intensity of his/her job satisfaction. Hierarchical Regression Analysis This study investigates the impact of the aforementioned research variables on job satisfaction through a hierarchical regression analysis using the following models.

Model 1. posits leader ship behavior as the independent variables and job satisfaction as the dependent variable, and finds that leadership behavior has a very significant impact on job satisfaction. (B = 0. 170, p